I can see a lot of good reasons why the House passed a resolution disapproving of Joe Wilson's outburst:
- Wilson's outburst was clearly a violation of House rules:
"A Member should avoid impugning the motives of another Member, the Senate or the President, using offensive language, or uttering words that are otherwise deemed unparliamentary."
And
[I]t is not permissible to use language that is personally offensive to the President, such as referring to him as a "hypocrite" or a "liar."
- Wilson's outburst is also putting what would otherwise be a difficult House seat in reach for Democrats:
In a matter of seconds Wednesday night Joe Wilson went from being pretty safe for reelection to one of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents in the country.
Wilson trails Democratic challenger Rob Miller 44-43 in a PPP survey conducted Thursday night and Friday morning. Last year Wilson defeated Miller 54-46.
- Health care reform and President Obama have received a bounce from the President's speech:
If we simply take the three polls at face value and average them together (6.7 points), they in fact point toward a statistically strong likelihood of a bounce.
While it is difficult to say if any of this bounce is due to Joe Wilson, at the very least it has kept Republicans on the defensive Passing this resolution keeps them in that position for another couple days, and also drives a wedge through the GOP. It isn't hard to see why:
USA Today/Gallup Poll. Sept. 11-13, 2009. N=1,030 adults nationwide. MoE ± 4.
"Do you support or oppose what Joe Wilson did during the speech?"
Suuport 21%--68% Oppose
- It is a good organizing tool. Organizations like the DCCC, MoveOn.org, and the PCCC have all either raised money or acquired new emails from the Democratic outrage over Wilson's outburst. If you are a progressive and / or Democratic organization not only does it make sense to organize around Democratic / progressive anger, but you also provide a useful outlet for the outraged Democrats / progressives.
So, the resolution is tactically smart, and easily justifiable. I also like and respect a lot of the people pushing the resolution, many of whom are not only lot smarter about politics than I am, but who wrote in favor of hitting back at Wilson on the front page of Open Left.
And yet, despite all of this, in an alternate universe where I am Congress, I would have voted "present" on the resolution disapproving of Wilson.
Personally, I just can't stand Congressional resolutions changing the names of government buildings, congratulating a championship sports team, recognizing the contribution of some individual or group to something, or condemning someone's actions. Congressional resolutions like these that only express an opinion, and don't actually accomplish anything in terms of public policy or federal appointments, are just too much political posturing for my tastes.
Eventually, I would like to get to a point where even submitting these resolutions is considered a political faux pas. For now, voting "present" is the best means I can think of to reject the entire culture of these resolutions.
So, this is one of those times where I disagree with the majority of my colleagues. There are, however, five Democratic members of Congress who seem to agree with me: Bill Delahunt, Eliot Engel, Bill Foster, Barney Frank and Ike Skelton. A mixed and small bag, but not an insignificant one. |
